 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before I got around to playing the whole set, I learned that the 15CD set I had invested well over $200 in contained inferior-sounding library cues and that if I wanted a single CD of those same library cues in better quality, I'd have to pay another $50+ to get it.
When the box set was pressed, the library cues were from the best source known to exist. When the better library cue reels showed up on eBay about four years later, La La Land got them and had to decide whether to vault them away in secret, or what.
Basil, even if you ignore the library cues altogether, the box still has every episode score. All of that wildly iconic, incredible music, and sounding fantastic. You got a bargain!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basil knows all of that, of course.
He follows this board very carefully which is how he learned about the 50th anniversary set with the (slightly) better sounding, earlier generation sourced library cues.
But you see… he feels a sense of entitlement, as well as a need to complain about everything and make himself the victim of avaricious soundtrack labels. And he’d rather never listen to his expensive (but later rendered imperfect) TOS soundtrack box set, in some weird act of protest.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can’t believe this seriously needs to be explained, but here goes:
If those library music cues were released on their own disc, they would not sell well enough. Just a single disc of random library cues, in slightly better sound quality than was available four years before? C’mon. Putting them in that 4CD set (quite reasonably priced for its size, by the way) was the only realistic way of getting that material out into the world. And even that didn’t work perfectly, as I’ve seen that set get put on sale quite a few times over the years.
As for the suggestion that La-La Land should purchase those tapes off eBay, pay people to master them and manufacture them on CD, and then pay to ship them to everyone who purchased the big box set four years before (which had a price point set based on their expenses at that time)… well, it’s like you’re eager for LLL to go out of business sooner rather than later.
I for one still miss FSM, and I want the other soundtrack specialty labels to be able to continue what they do as long as possible.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ignorance is bliss.
Yavar
Don't tell Arthur that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The thing is, ANY recording ever made and put out could theoretically be remastered, remixed, revisited, expanded, etc. If you feel like an upgrade is worth it, by all means buy it, if you don't, don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, for one, labels generally cannot simply release what they want any way they want. If they included these cues on a 4CD album and also on a single disc sold separately, they'd have to negotiate for two releases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digital releases are a whole different ballgame with licensors.
That's for sure. LLL doesn't get a say in the download versions, and they don't get any money if I heard right.
All but two of the 15 TOS albums are available for download purchase, if I recall. It's at the iTunes store, Amazon downloads, and apparently you can hear it on Spotify. Similar situation with the Lost in Space box. But it's better with the booklets you get in the actual box sets.
That was three years ago. Now the STAR TREK box is long gone from the iTunes store and Amazon Digital. I wish I knew why. The 12-disc LOST IN SPACE set is still available. Its rights have a different owner, but you'd think the two would be comparable in the marketplace.
The situation for STAR TREK music now is right where it was for decades: you can buy the five vintage GNP albums, and the four Royal Philharmonic albums, but not the LLL set. It's like a classic Disney movie that went back into the studio vault to keep it scarce. But unlike Disney, I don't think there's a marketing strategy going on here, it's more likely CBS doesn't care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And that's what I call a better-worded argument. Star Wars and Star Trek are different franchises. TOS and TNG are not.
You're right.
"Star Trek" is the franchise. The Original Series, TNG, the Bad Robot movies, etc. are different series within the franchise. Some fans like them all. Others like only some.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So were Andy Griffith Show, Mayberry RFD, and Gomer Pyle all the same franchise? This is critical to our understanding of my "argument," not to mention the universe.
Another crossover universe: The Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, and Petticoat Junction. I can only stand the first one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So were Andy Griffith Show, Mayberry RFD, and Gomer Pyle all the same franchise? This is critical to our understanding of my "argument," not to mention the universe.
Don’t forget The Andy Griffith Show itself was a spin-off!
https://youtu.be/fkFDKu54ZfU
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So were Andy Griffith Show, Mayberry RFD, and Gomer Pyle all the same franchise? This is critical to our understanding of my "argument," not to mention the universe.
Mayberry RFD was actually just the name of the show after Andy and Opie left town. Everyone else stayed on. It wasn't really a "new" series, just kind of an adjustment. You couldn't call it The Andy Griffith Show if Andy Griffith left. Gomer Pyle is more a simple spin off where the character spun back ON when Gomer was cancelled. Like Enos and The Dukes of Hazzard.
However, Green Acres, Petticoat Junction and The Beverly Hillbillies are related but not part of "The Beverly Hillbillies Franchise." Any more than Laverne and Shirley / Mork & Mindy are part of "the Happy Days Franchise." Or The Jeffersons, Maude and Good Times are part of an "All in the Family Franchise." They're just spin off which can and did exist independently.
Star Trek has a common theme: each show and movie concerns the United Federation of Planets and/or Starfleet personnel. They're all made under the "Star Trek" banner and brand. Same with Star Wars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I patiently await the next installment from the Hooterville Televised Universe (HTU)... or the 'Hooterverse,' if you will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
